[Causality1]

It's rather astonishing that all the safety regulations for cars manage to exist in the same legal system that allows motorcycles on public roads at all. Last I read the death risk ratio was about 24x.

[JohnBooty]

Surely it's because: on a motorcycle you usually only hurt yourself?

In a car you tend to hurt other people including any kids, etc that may be along for the ride.

[Causality1]

More likely it's just because cycles existed before the safety regulations and there would be too much backlash to banning them. Plenty of other things that only harm yourself, like drugs or unpasteurized milk are also illegal.

[taneq]

I’m still amazed by this one. My first thought on riding a 250 was “how is this possibly legal?” And then the jump to a big bore (non-cruiser) is completely insane.

[_carbyau_]

As a motorcycle rider (every day commuter) I often think that if motorcycles didn't already exist, they wouldn't be allowed to.

As per sibling comment, maybe the only reason they are tolerated is that the risk is statistically largely to the rider themselves.

IE the person taking the risk is largely the target of the consequences.

If motorcycles somehow magically penetrated into peoples cars in a crash I think people would rule them out pretty quick.